What a Shame!

The Short Version:

Place:   State of Washington School District

What happened?

            The district agreed to hire Tremco Roofing, 
             headquartered in Ohio, through King County 
             Directors’ Association

Who protested?

            Scott Henden, school board member, voted against the
            contract, saying he saw it as a “single source” contract.
            He would have preferred the roofing contract go out to
            bid and that local companies be allowed to submit
            bids.  "I am not comfortable going single source at
            $400,000,” he said.

Now there's a good man! 

____________________________________________

How many of you have seen this scenario before?

A School Board is approached to fund a new roof - by a manufacturer.  You know, the you know who's going around duly licensed architects and engineers to "sell" products direct, at E-N-O-R-M-O-U-S prices.

Or the Facilities Director says it just has to be one manufacturer and NOW.

In this case, two commissioners and the President of the School Board vote it in - after the President of the School Board de-clares in no uncertain terms their kids don't need to be rained or snowed on....approving a $400,000 contract to Tremco - with one lone dissenter.

We'd love to know how much product that was sold to them was applicable, and how much was left over after the job was done on the winning contractor's yard....it's not returnable.

But we also all know what will happen next.  That dissenter will be off the board in no time - just like Assistant Maintenance Directors and staff architects, etc. forced off the job for questioning their bosses as to why why why are we doing something that has no checks and balances in it and costs so-so-so much and redoing them soooooooo quickly?!?!?!?

For instance:  The Facilities managers at the largest high school district in California, after years of questioning new bosses ramrodding through purchase orders for roofing, go to the FBI, who does nothing and then the concerned facilities managers take it to the Legislature- with a Legislative aide apparently sending the FBI documentation to the School District (the very men involved).

The concerned facilities managers, harrassed because they were good and doing bidding the right way - then find themselves fired and frankly slandered by the Superintendent in a closed School Board meeting in order to get them fired.  (Just proven in depositions in June, 2013).

Men who were doing their jobs, felt something was terribly wrong, did not go along with the Garland Purchase Order Scheme brought in by new managers and directors from various parts of the state that seemed to know each other from certain organizations (CASH and CASBO, apparently)..... to the tune of $200,000 a year plus broken-up construction contracts going to a relative of the Garland rep at one point....and one contractor on most of the work....putting products into warrantied roofs and you know what happens to the real warranties....

Did you get that?

You have probably seen it hundreds of times.

So one North Kitsap School Board member in  Poulsbo, Washington, Scott Henden, has that familiar "Queasy" feeling that somethings' not right - but he can't stop the ramrod machine.

Here's part of the article:
"
Scott Henden, school board member, voted against the contract, saying he saw it as a “single source” contract. He would have preferred the roofing contract go out to bid and that local companies be allowed to submit bids. “I am not comfortable going single source at $400,000,” he said.

Dave Dyess, director of maintenance and facilities for the district, said it was important to get the work done quickly while the weather was cooperative. He said there were leaks in 13 different places during the last school year.

Henden took issue with the hurried nature of the bidding process, saying someone knew for years the roof at Vinland was a problem."

Read more: http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2013/jul/12/north-kitsap-school-board-approves-roofing/#ixzz2ZGxAOd1M

So here we see the ol' hurry up and fix the years-long problem - without normal checks and balances.

How much of the structure was looked at by a structural engineer?

Hmmmmm.....good question, Scott Henden.

We know what will happen next, Scott.
1.  No FBI investigation.  He doesn't know what the kickbacks are....or why that door is slammed shut real tight to competition, as required by law.
2.  Certainly no State Attorney General Investigation will happen - this is liberal Washington, and if it's a liberal area, you can bet nothing will happen.  It's been the pattern......
3.  The Architects and Engineers, afraid of losing work, go wibbly-wobbly.  What they don't know is that if that roof has the asphalts shorted, it could cause leaks, damage to the structure and in snow country, possible roof cave-ins over time.  In essence, it threatens the life, safety, health and welfare of everyone inside and who owns the structures...what Architects and Engineers hold licenses for in the first place.

Just ask the nervous former Hickman Reps calling me from New Jersey, after they inherited their own jobs as Viridian, as to how to keep from honoring the warranties.  The roofs were leaking after one year because.....drum roll!.....the asphalts were shorted because, according to one of those reps, "My bosses took me to lunch last year and told me they were pulling $40,000 out of a job (job was in the low $100,000's) to pay off the folks they needed to - and shorting the asphalts - that's how they got the money out of the jobs to make payoffs!"......are you getting this?

One of the involved manufacturers' reps wrote in a recent spec, in a disdainful "joke" - showing three incompatible systems being done on one roof  for a "clueless" school system in southern California.

That's how much respect they have for their Marks.

Specified were SBS Modified parts, APP Modified parts, and Coal Tar listed all as parts of one roof....Holy Moly!  Clearly, the reps had no respect for their "Marks"!

A few months later, numerous persons were arrested and indicted for taking kickbacks, including most of the School Board for that School District.  No kidding.....and no surprise.

So to the one lone member on the School Board, Scott Henden, don't you stop what you are doing.  Yes, you will catch hell - but guess what?

Someone on the East Coast sent me your newspaper clipping.  There are people all over the US and in other countries, watching - and they are here for you.

See the story here:
 http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2013/jul/12/north-kitsap-school-board-approves-roofing/#axzz2Z4tn1sdo

Garland Named by Tea Party Activist at Televised School Board Hearing - in the largest California High School District

Bill Lind, the head of the local Tea Party in Bakersfield, California has named Garland in a televised School Board Hearing last night as being involved with their local high school district's personnel in corruption - and the school board covering up - for over 10 years.

To their faces.

The Kern High School District is the largest in California, with 18 high schools and other schools.

The Garland Roofing Purchase Orders in the amount of $200,000 per year with broken-up roofing construction contracts in the tens of thousands at a time going to Commercial Roofing - all of them - for over 10 years was the focus of Bill Linds' remarks.

A previous post on this blog from July, 2010 details those broken-up contracts.

Bill Lind showed a report from a staff accountant, John Cronen, detailing the Garland purchase orders.

New Story on air - naming Garland:
http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/Tea-party-member-accuses-Kern-High-School-District-of-corruption-212869701.html?tab=video&c=y

New Story in print - naming Garland: 
http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/grade/x607077386/Tea-party-activist-criticizes-KHSD-board

Original Story on Air:
http://www.kget.com/news/local/story/Retirees-suing-KHSD-are-honored-by-trustees/PX4rHjOe502Ffc533Nwp3w.cspx

UPDATE, Tuesday, June 25, 2013:


A protest was held this date outside of the Kern High School District by the NAACP.  The televised version is here:

http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/Protesters-alleged-Kern-High-School-District-corruption-213008961.html?tab=video&c=y

Oklahoma Enacts Legislation Addressing Gratuities for Sole-Sourced

Oklahoma has just instituted a new law - Enrolled Senate Bill No. 630 - aimed at but missing the bulls' eye of the heart of the roofing scams targeting schools and other public construction works dollars.

I was contacted several weeks ago just after its' passage, and sent a copy.  I have posted it below.

However, I was just as dismayed in reading it as I was the debacle passed in the California Legislature - after more than 13 years' work at that point to expose the scam.

The new Oklahoma law targets contractors as the source of bribes in the scam, when they are not the source and method of how the scam operates.


We believe and have heard repeatedly the same story in two countries - that particular  manufacturers train their reps to get in way ahead of any planning to budgetary "decision makers" - practicing architecture and engineering without a license in most cases.  We even have posted their in-house training documents that show how they do so.

Tremco and Garland's own in-house documents state precisely how they do it, minus the kickbacks involved.

But the new law does not require product manufacturers whose products are part of the winning bid, local officials such as School Boards or City Councils, or school administrators and other personnel to certify they had no involvement with gifts of any kind for bid awards.  
The Law should have primarily - primarily - required manufacturers whose products are part of the winning bid sign the same document.  

The document should require all and any Manufacturer's Managers and Reps in the area who were involved with the School Boards, Purchasing Organizations, City Councils, Superintendents, School Administrators and staff and Facilities Directors and staff to sign the same document as required of contractors.

The Law should have also required all decision makers - every School Board Member, Purchasing Agency Directors on down, City Council members, Superintendents, School Administrators and staff, and Facilities Directors and staff - to sign the same document.

And there is no mention of those supposedly writing (or copying) manufacturer's very own restrictive proprietary performance specifications being required to certify they did not receive gratuities to sole-source products.

Here is a copy of the new Oklahoma Governor's signed Bill, copied in below.
____________________________________________

AN ACT

ENROLLED SENATE

BILL NO. 630                       By: Jolley of the Senate

                                               and

                                        Murphey of the House

An Act relating to sole source purchase contracts; amending 74 O.S. 2011, Section 85.22, which relates to competitive bidding; modifying certification requirements; authorizing substitution of certain products; prohibiting purchasing restrictions to certain geographical areas; authorizing promulgation of rules to implement act; providing for codification; providing for noncodification; and declaring an emergency.

SUBJECT:  Competitive bidding procedures

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

SECTION 1.     AMENDATORY     74 O.S. 2011, Section 85.22, is amended to read as follows:

Section 85.22.  Any competitive bid submitted to the State of Oklahoma or contract executed by the state for goods or services in excess of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) shall contain a certification, which shall be in substantially the following form:

A.  For purposes of competitive bids, I certify:

1.  I am the duly authorized agent of _____________, the bidder submitting the competitive bid which is attached to this statement, for the purpose of certifying the facts pertaining to the existence of collusion among bidders and between bidders and state officials or employees, as well as facts pertaining to the giving or offering of things of value to government personnel in return for special consideration in the letting of any contract pursuant to the bid to which this statement is attached;

2.  I am fully aware of the facts and circumstances surrounding the making of the bid to which this statement is attached and have been personally and directly involved in the proceedings leading to the submission of such bid; and

3.  Neither the bidder nor anyone subject to the bidder's direction or control has been a party:

a.   to any collusion among bidders in restraint of freedom of competition by agreement to bid at a fixed price or to refrain from bidding,

b.   to any collusion with any state official or employee as to quantity, quality or price in the prospective contract, or as to any other terms of such prospective contract, nor

c.   in any discussions between bidders and any state official concerning exchange of money or other thing of value for special consideration in the letting of a contract, nor

d.   to any efforts or offers with state agency or political subdivision officials or others to create a sole brand acquisition or a sole source acquisition in contradiction to Section 2 of this act.

B.  I certify, if awarded the contract, whether competitively bid or not, neither the contractor nor anyone subject to the contractor’s direction or control has paid, given or donated or agreed to pay, give or donate to any officer or employee of the State of Oklahoma any money or other thing of value, either directly or indirectly, in procuring the contract to which this statement is attached.

Certified this _______ day of_________________ 20__.

SECTION 2.     NEW LAW     A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 85.45j.1 of Title 74, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

A.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law or agency rule to the contrary, any bid submissions received by a state agency or any political subdivision pursuant to authorized sole source bidding procedures established by the provisions of Section 85.45j of Title 74 of the Oklahoma Statutes, which substitute an item with one that is alike in quality and design or which meets the required specifications of the bid shall be considered and shall not be prohibited.  In terms of public construction contracts, with exception of specific products submitted and approved prior to release for bidding by the Oklahoma Attorney General for matching preexisting materials, at least three equivalent items from more than one manufacturer and more than one supplier or representative shall be included in the required specifications.

B.  In addition, no sole source bid proposal shall require any limitation that materials must be supplied from a vendor within any specific geographical area.  Geographic preference for vendors inside the geographical boundaries may be given, but only when the cost is the same or less.

SECTION 3.     NEW LAW     A new section of law not to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes reads as follows:

The Office of Management and Enterprise Services is authorized to promulgate rules as necessary to implement the provisions of this act.

SECTION 4.  It being immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and approval."

Passed the Senate the 30th day of April, 2013.

                             

                                 Presiding Officer of the Senate

Passed the House of Representatives the 17th day of April, 2013.

                            

                                  Presiding Officer of the House

                                              of Representatives

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR

Received by the Office of the Governor this ____________________ day of ___________________, 20_______, at _______ o'clock _______ M.

By: _________________________________

Approved by the Governor of the State of Oklahoma this _________ day of ___________________, 20_______, at _______ o'clock _______ M.

                                _________________________________

                                Governor of the State of Oklahoma

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE

Received by the Office of the Secretary of State this __________ day of __________________, 20 _______, at _______ o'clock _______ M.

By: _________________________________

More Foxes in the Henhouse

One can always tell what an organization fears the most by whom they hire when it comes to lawyers.

Tremco is no exception.

Seen on a Linked-In page over the past week - a new hire for Tremco - says it all:

[Name withheld]

Director of Compliance at Tremco

Cleveland/Akron, Ohio Area

Law Practice

Previous	United States Department of Justice,  U.S. District Court - Eastern District Kentucky,  Schlumberger Industries
Education	Northern Kentucky University—Salmon P. Chase College of Law

Summary

Managed large-scale criminal investigations
Examined hundreds of witnesses in grand jury pretrial and trial settings
Extensive motion practice in all phases of litigation
Thorough knowledge of regulatory compliance issues
E-discovery expertise

Specialties:

Antitrust and Unfair Business Practices
White Collar Criminal Defense
Procurement Fraud
Regulatory Compliance

Experience:

Tremco

December 2012 – Present (6 months)Cleveland/Akron, Ohio Area 

Trial Attorney

United States Department of Justice

August 2000 – December 2012 (12 years 5 months)Northeast Ohio

Trial attorney specializing in prosecuting white collar criminal defendants for bid rigging, price fixing, mail and wire fraud. Experienced in complex litigation and E-discovery. Convicted four defendants in two five week trials. Earned guilty pleas from 20 corporate and individual defendants resulting in total sentences of 312 months and $8.7 million in fines and restitution. Led multiple criminal investigations in a variety of industries. Presented extensively to groups about government compliance issues. Served as office liaison for E-Discovery issues.

 

The Fox Is In The Henhouse: RPM/Tremco Places a 20-Year Veteran of the US Attorney General's Offices on Their Board of Directors

Folks - you thought for the first time in years there just might be - might be - a chance Tremco and their ways would be caught and prosecuted, now that the GSA is after them.

Not so.

It seems they have just put on the board of RPM a former 20-year employee of the US Attorney General's Offices to be on their staff.  He actually served as an acting US Deputy Attorney General.

Do you think in your wildest dreams any of the Madoff-like scammers will EVER be prosecuted now?

Clearly, RPM and Tremco are afraid of prosecutions.  They must have a good reason to be......

Here's the story - and for what happened in my case and since with the FBI....read on.  Agents in New Jersey have apparently told one source there they have been told not to investigate School Boards - the very persons paid off or suspected to be to allow illegally sole-sourced roofing contracts in School work, etc.  It's ingrown, it's redneck - and how many thousands is it affecting?

Way too many.  Time for the industry to go after it...individuals alone cannot.

The corruption is massive and huge.  And it's not just with the one the GSA caught....this time.

________________________________________

RPM Appoints Craig S. Morford to Board of Directors; William A. Papenbrock Retiring in October

"MEDINA, Ohio, April 18, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- RPM International Inc. (NYSE: RPM) announced today that it has appointed Craig S. Morford to its board of directors in anticipation of the retirement of William A. Papenbrock. Papenbrock will retire at the company's upcoming annual meeting on October 10, 2013, after 41 years of service to the company.

Morford was appointed as a Class I member of the RPM board and will serve on the governance and nominating committee. His term will expire on October 10, 2013, at which time he will stand for re-election to the board in Class I by RPM's stockholders.

Morford is the chief legal and compliance officer of Cardinal Health, a $108 billion health care services company traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Among his responsibilities are legal affairs, regulatory compliance, corporate governance, environmental health and safety compliance, corporate ethics and enterprise risk management. Before joining Cardinal Health, he spent 20 years with the U.S. Department of Justice, which included an appointment by President George W. Bush as acting U.S. deputy attorney general. In this role, he oversaw 100,000 employees at 93 U.S. Attorney offices, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Morford is a member of The Association of General Counsel and serves on its executive committee. He also serves on the audit and compliance committee of the Ohio State University board of trustees. Morford earned his bachelor's degree in economics from Hope College and a juris doctorate from Valparaiso University."

 See:  http://finance.yahoo.com/news/rpm-appoints-craig-morford-board-141700928.html

__________________________________________________

Let's just hope the new FBI Director this Fall does not do what Robert Mueller did - ignore the problem - or help get the right Director in at the job:

 See:   http://ca.news.yahoo.com/fbis-longtime-director-faces-criticism-bureau-again-122025633.html

Why is it important the US Attorney General prosecute when people come forward with information?

Because the FBI's hands have been tied behind their back and they have been thrown to the wolves, and us with them.

Did you know that because they aren't allowed to wiretap, hundreds of millions - now billions - in California School Bond funds have been stolen from and way more lost coast-to-coast in schools, not to mention Canada and the UK and beyond?

The only way to catch the kickbacks and more is to have "someone that heard or saw someone giving a bribe or the person that gave or got it come forward to the FBI.''

Are you kidding? All that massive disruption of businesses, lives, careers, and schools for what!?  Political power???

What are you willing to do to help stop the scams?

Everyone - everyone working together - can get it done.

Exposure is the KEY.

We need a US Attorney willing to prosecute, the FBI Director not hamstringing investigations, and the FBI allowed to wiretap and more.  

We need papers not involved in covering up rabidly going after the scams - just as rabid or more than the scammers are at purporting the scams.

And those in the roofing industry who know of kickbacks and not just in the US - to come forward to investigators everywhere.

_____________________________________

Here's what happened in my case and what roofing industry people keep saying coast-to-coast:

In 1997, the FBI in San Francisco "strongly recommended prosecutions" of my bosses at the University of California, San Francisco for letting out construction bid specifications illegally sole-sourced to one manufacturer. I was their Senior Architect on staff.

It turned out to be a massive scam from three manufacturers in Ohio, one of them targeting school bond funds in a number of countries since the 1930's. That would be the one in the story above....

Instead, the US Attorney General's offices in San Francisco refused to prosecute. The US Attorney General was Robert Mueller.

The ensuing devastation and anger in many quarters in at least three countries - including a lot of Canadian roofers and roof consultants trying to stop the waste, fraud and abuse in Canadian schools and public works projects - is quite something.

This scam has affected many tens of thousands.

Robert Mueller helped continue the fraud, waste and abuse. Clearly, he had to be a little too friendly with the Administration (Office of the President) at the University of California, the Chairman of the Board of which was Senator Dianne Feinstein's husband - Dick Blum - since.  Dick Blum owned and may still have involvement at URS - a construction company that gets billions in government contracts....headquartered out of San Francisco.    (For more stories on the Dianne Feinstein connection to government contracts, you can see that here:  http://www.peterbyrne.info/feinstein_files/ .  The reporter is a self-described leftist, but he's more independent thinking than he seems to know.  And right on target.)

It really, truly is a bad-good-old-boys'-and'-girls'-club destroying so many.  Monopolistic Thieves in Do-Gooder's Clothes, at least in San Francisco where it's that special kind of blindness is so well practiced.  And maybe in your community, too.  Look around.  It's usually the most "prominent..."....or at least so self-promoting individuals, involved somehow.

Had Robert Mueller prosecuted - California alone would have saved over $500 million a year in overcharges and fraudulently installed roofs in schools and public work.  For the past 16 years.  But nooooooo, they didn't want fannies exposed.  Image is absolutely everything to thieves.

And that's not to mention all the other savings in products illegally sole-sourced and redone way too soon.

What!!!  you say....oh yes.

Massive amounts of bundling of mechanical equipment, ten times the price for air control valves that leaked when the ones they supplanted at much lower costs did not (and in hospitals - hmmm, alll those rising infection rates due to such?), hardware sole-sourced and changed over to a manufacturer that regularly charges double for that "No Bid" construction contracts, carpets similarly overcharged, windows, fencing, etc....all throughout schools and public work.

A real pig's trough.

 To the initiate or self-righteous, aggrandizing - some we have seen braggadicio - sales personnel of these companies:  the sole sourced contracts are not legal. 

Witness what the California Supreme Court Justice who stood up at the beginning of my Oral Hearings in my whistleblowing case did.

The California Supreme Court Justice stood and screamed while wagging his finger up and down at the University of California Attorney, "You tell your clients these were criminal acts!!! You tell your clients these were criminal acts!!!" For about 7 or 8 minutes.

The University of California attorneys  were also Johns Manville attorneys.

J-M openly private labels for the scammers I caught onto, Tremco.

Did the taxpayers win?

Of course not.

More white-horse guys rode in - to no avail.  A couple of years previously, the California Bureau of State Audits tore apart the University of California, San Francisco for the same bid specs used regularly for over 20 years on 110+ buildings, including more than several major hospitals...in an investigative report.

Why is all this going on besides greed on the parts of Administrators and politicians dealing with construction contracts?

Kickbacks from such contracts are dirtying whole school boards and councils are used to do it - and to see who can be controlled and "moved up" in the political world.

Everyone involved seem to be in positions to cover up.

That's the bottom line - it was who threatened me that told that story.  Think investigators don't get it-all over?

Think again, RPM/Tremco and Garland.

But today? FBI Agents in other states have told colleagues that they are not being allowed to investigate school boards when approached with this scam.

That's what we keep hearing.

So thanks to Robert Mueller in 1997 and since, massive theft of the taxpayer dollar, school roofs in snow country drying out way too soon and water destroying the structure from "shorting" asphalts between the plies (endangering kids), many in the roofing industry who do it right are run out of business and whole families and extended families ruined - not to mention all the architects and engineers taking kickbacks to do the specs or going along to get along - unethical and criminal acts performed have occurred & much more.

At a massive, huge expense to everyone.

The GSA's Office of Inspector General finds irregularities in Chicago's Federal Building Roof Replacement Project

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) at the General Services Administration (GSA) in Chicago issued a memo October 13, 2011 criticizing the award and administration of the Chicago Federal Building Roof Replacement bid - awarded to Tremco.


The areas of concern were:
1.  "The project should not have been awarded under a Multiple 
      Award Schedule (MAS) given the non routine aspects of
      the project."

2.  "Public Buildings Service (PBS) personnel did not resolve
      the significant difference between bids and the 
      Independent Government Estimate (IGE) prior to award."

3.  "Several months after award, PBS issued a modification 
     for over $1 million, which could not be verified to the MAS 
     price list."

4.  "Five subcontractors did not provide certified payroll records."

"On July 24, 2009, the Great Lakes Region’s PBS awarded a $2,461,717 task order (GSP0509SI0362) to Tremco, Inc., of Beachwood, Ohio."

 "On July 16, 2009, the estimator sent the contracting officer an email with an IGE, totaling $4,038,177, for this project. Four vendors submitted bids, three of which ranged from 20 to 39 percent below the original IGE amount.

PBS awarded the task order toTremco, the low bidder, for $2,461,717, 39 percent below the IGE."

"On December 15, 2009, PBS issued modification PC02,  for $1,045,194.  The modification raised the total value of the order to $3,506,91."

The project was funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  

See:   http://www.recovery.gov/Accountability/inspectors/Documents/GSA%20OIG%20Recovery%20Act%20Memo-Clark%20Roof%20FINAL.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,0,800